Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Help me explain to my teenager why Thatcher was bad.

then how did the 'ra find bins to drop bombs in in the '90s? Hell, there were bins on the tube till the '90s before they brought in the transparent bags at above ground stations.
I don't remember it lasting as long as the 1990s, not on any widespread basis anyway, but my memory might be shifting a few years. It was mainly railway stations to start with wasn't it?

E2A: this says it was a bomb at Victoria in 1991 which started the railway station thing. No citation, but it would fit OK with my hazy memories. I'd been using trains enough by then to notice when it changed, but I'm surprised it was that late.
 
I don't remember it lasting as long as the 1990s, not on any widespread basis anyway, but my memory might be shifting a few years. It was mainly railway stations to start with wasn't it?

E2A: this says it was a bomb at Victoria in 1991 which started the railway station thing. No citation, but it would fit OK with my hazy memories. I'd been using trains enough by then to notice when it changed, but I'm surprised it was that late.
oh yeh bomb at victoria killed on iirc w/o the benefit of your link. And a bomb in camden in I believe '92 and one at harrods.
 
i saw a headline in the substandard (I think) yesterday with petronella wyatt going on about how thatcher was like a mother to her.
 
Margret Thatcher

Was not a good mother.
Fact.
This is the least important reason in the world to hate her. It's an utter irrelevancy. And it implies that women should be judged by their parenting skills, in a way that men rarely are.

There's no need for this line of counter-argument, if that is what it is intended as. Her children are horrible people and I feel no sympathy for their loss, only contempt that they didn't disown her. Their feelings are a stupid argument for holding back from the partying, let alone from making the political points that might get some airtime for a change (and for which the parties are useful space-making devices).
 
I didn't live through those times in Britain; but do people think that the country would be in better shape if she'd never been PM? [nor anyone like her who did the same things?]
Yes, very much so, her remedy for the problems we faced made things better for a minority in the short run, and much, much worse for all but a fortunate few in the long run
My recollection of Britain pre-Thatcher was a visit for a couple of weeks in approx. 1980. I was astonished at how dysfunctional the place seemed to be - so many different types of worker were on strike. Something was affected or compromised every day. The final insult to injury was, the airport arrival/departure flipper board sign workers were on strike - so it was a big scramble to find out when and where my plane would be.
oh gawd, not this old one....workers strike as a last resort Johnny, what you saw was workers standing up for themselves and fighting for their rights. And if that causes inconvenience for a few - tough. It takes two to tango, so why not ask how much management were to blame?
She may well have been overly zealous and draconian; but for those old enough to remember, didn't it seem to you like the country was headed for the rocks back then?
It had problems, but as I said she made things far, far worse.We lost 30% of our manufacturing capacity during her time, the main reason why we have such a badly unbalanced economy now. We have no home owned steel industry, coal industry, car industry or domestically owned power generation.
And we are facing fallout every day now, in so many ways, for the fact that she trashed society.
She was also handed on a plate the wealth of the biggest oil find in Western Europe and she squandered the lot on tax cuts, and enriching her Big Ticket corporate mates
 
This is the least important reason in the world to hate her. It's an utter irrelevancy. And it implies that women should be judged by their parenting skills, in a way that men rarely are.

There's no need for this line of counter-argument, if that is what it is intended as. Her children are horrible people and I feel no sympathy for their loss, only contempt that they didn't disown her. Their feelings are a stupid argument for holding back from the partying, let alone from making the political points that might get some airtime for a change (and for which the parties are useful space-making devices).

It's relevant to all the "think of her family in these sad times" stuff. Her family don't seem to have been fond of her at all, and I don't blame them. Have Mark or Carol put out any statements at all?

Btw, I am reading all the responses and will bring some of them up with my daughter. Fortunately she asked why Thatcher was so bad, so I can give her a one-sided answer with a clear conscience.
 
It's relevant to all the "think of her family in these sad times" stuff. Her family don't seem to have been fond of her at all, and I don't blame them. Have Mark or Carol put out any statements at all?
I wasn't very clear, but that is what my second paragraph is supposed to mean. You don't have to criticise her parenting skills to refute the "think of her family" shit.

Btw, I am reading all the responses and will bring some of them up with my daughter. Fortunately she asked why Thatcher was so bad, so I can give her a one-sided answer with a clear conscience.
Excellent. :cool: :D

You'll make sure she knows there is only one side though, right? :hmm:
 
I didn't live through those times in Britain; but do people think that the country would be in better shape if she'd never been PM? [nor anyone like her who did the same things?]

My recollection of Britain pre-Thatcher was a visit for a couple of weeks in approx. 1980. I was astonished at how dysfunctional the place seemed to be - so many different types of worker were on strike. Something was affected or compromised every day. The final insult to injury was, the airport arrival/departure flipper board sign workers were on strike - so it was a big scramble to find out when and where my plane would be.

She may well have been overly zealous and draconian; but for those old enough to remember, didn't it seem to you like the country was headed for the rocks back then?

Only if you believed what you read in the papers. Thatcher got in, in 1979, at a time when the economy was showing "green shoots of recovery". Her policies, more than anything her predecessors in govt did, meant a surge in unemployment, just between '79 and '80, of close to half a million, which in turn meant greater union action. Why wouldn't you strike when your very livelihood was threatened by what her government had promised to do?
 
Looks like she was elected in 1979; the miner's strike apparently was in 84? I was there in 1980.

I don't think Thatcher had taken many if any of her steps to curtail union power etc in 1980; it's similar to Reagan who was elected in 1980, but didn't fire PATCO until 1981.

What I saw was Britain before Thatcher's drastic changes were implemented.

What you saw, even if you visited in January '80, was a UK that had already had several significant pieces of legislation promulgated since May '79. They revoked existing pay compacts with public sector workers (unheard of, back then, when govts traditionally honoured agreements made by their predecessors, and redressed issues at the next pay round) and announced "reviews" of several key industries in the manufacturing and extractive sectors. By the time you visited, trade unionists were well aware of where Thatcher would go, given the chance. That it took 5 years to be in a position to achieve her wishes doesn't detract from the fact that her wishes were obvious from the moment she took power.
 
She almost immediately provoked/encouraged a massive steel strike that lasted 4 bitterly fought months - and in that same early period attempted to push through a raft of mine closures. She got working straight away.

Joseph, Neave, Ridley et al had after all been planning this stuff from the moment they helped get her elected as leader of their party.
 
Play them this

A little explanation of the background, war, destruction of whole communities and industries....
Might get it accross better than a undifferentiated stream of vitriol
 
Back
Top Bottom